Why Be You, When You Can Be New?: Part 2

This is the second part of the two-part series examining the many proposed rule and policy changes for the upcoming season. Part one takes the side of not wanting to implement change, and in here, part two will explain why changes need to be made, and need to be made now.

What makes a sport truly entertaining? Is it having astonishing athletes doing things that average Joe's are unable to do? Is it being a unique event unlike any other? Is it having fans that compete in the stands just as fiercely as the competitors in the field of play? Probably a little bit of every one of those things, and then so much more.

Something that has been plaguing the sport of collegiate dodgeball as of late has been the lack of spectator value. Sure the game is fun when you're in the moment, but when it comes to those off the court waiting anxiously for something to happen, that is where the entertainment drops off. Some may argue that they do find value in viewing every single match, but for a large majority, that view is shifted towards the opposite end. Just this past year, with over 200 official matches being recorded, the average score was 3.3-0.6, or roughly 3-1. In an hour long game, we should be scoring more often than four times. The speed of the game is too slow, there are not enough upsets happening, and there are lazy ways to compete and still win under the current system.

For those that watched the championship at Nationals 2016 between CMU and GVSU, it was a fairly mediocre game to watch (commentating aside). A 1-0 victory for GVSU while playing out the end of the match with only three players, GVSU had every right to be excited after capping out their fourth straight national title, but many were left feeling unsatisfied. After scoring the lone point of the match, GVSU was able to block and reset their way to victory. Before I go any further, this is not to knock GVSU by any measure, in fact, the way they played is the smartest way to do it. It is not entertaining, but it is efficient. But why can't we have entertainment and smart gameplay? That's where the changes come into play.

Let's bring in the lines closer so we can get kills more successfully, and make blocking and catching more of a skill. Let's lower our shot-clock so we can get more balls in the air, and as a result, more plays happening. Let's make sure a ball stays live until it hits the ground to give throwers an advantage.

Offense is what drives the entertainment of sports. After all, there is a reason why when you look at an MVP in any professional sport, the first stats you look at are their offensive ones; points per game, touchdowns, etc. Our league, the National Collegiate Dodgeball Association (NCDA), needs to match this mentality. We need to have games that are higher scoring than your typical soccer match. That is what will get more people excited to play. That is what will help teams recruit more talented players. That is what will make people want to come out and watch our tournaments.

On top of that, let's change the foundation of how we value teams in respect to their counterparts. Let's change our ranking system. The Gonzalez system which we currently have in place has been a very good predictor of matches, predicting around 90% of all matches correctly this past season, and all but one game on Sunday at Nationals. But why should we have expected outcomes? Isn't the unpredictability of a sport essential in making it special? Sure it's cool to say you "know" which teams are going to win based on that ranking, but if that's the case then what's the point of even playing the final tournament?

In college sports especially, "Cinderella" teams are what drive entertainment. Look at college basketball for instance. March Madness is one of the greatest spectacles in any sports fan's year. 68 teams playing it out on the court with the hopes of becoming national champions. But what makes it so special is not just the number of teams competing, it's that second word, Madness. Anything can happen during the tournament. Any game that isn't a 1 versus 16 seed matchup is never a safe bet. Upsets are what make victors feel more energetic, and losers feel more demoralized. The more emphasis we place on possible upsets, the more intensity teams will play with, and the more entertaining games will be.

Also, why should a team's record in 2005 have any impact on their 2016 ranking? That's just silly, especially in college sports where teams aren't even the same anymore after four to five years. And even if our new ranking system isn't perfect, that can actually be good for the sport. Controversy also drives entertainment off the court. Scandals, dilemmas, and controversy are a major part of professional athletics that get us more engaged. If we have a ranking system that becomes a little bit fuzzier, it'll make teams more competitive, and make teams want to compete on the court even more to prove they are better than their opponent and that the stats are wrong.

All of that to say this. We need change, now. In order for dodgeball to peak into the realm of being recognized as an official collegiate sport by the NCAA, there has to be an incentive for schools to invest in it. That incentive, is entertainment. More kills, tougher catches, more upsets, less stalling, these are a few of the things what will bring the sport into a new era. Change is necessary for growth in any person, thing, or idea, and, like a plant, "if we aren't growing, we're dying."

There is the conclusion to the two part article. July 15th through July 31st is when voting on new rules and regulations will take place. Take into consideration some of the things I said here, as well as in part one, and be sure to respond with any of your thoughts and opinions. We can't get better as a group if we do not strive to bring new ideas to the forefront, and make everyone aware of our concerns.